Fostering collaboration through developer competitions: the relevance of social relations for limited-profit housing in Vienna

Social Housing Organisations in England and The Netherlands: Between the State, Market and Community

Rapid and deep changes in society, the economy and policy over the last decades are having an increasing impact on the delivery of social housing in North Western Europe. These changes are transforming the way in which social housing providers perform their task and are reshaping their relationships with the State, communities and with other market actors. The combination of continued State withdrawal from service provision, the deep and persistent effects of the global financial crisis that begun in 2008 and profound changes in the type of demand for social housing across North Western Europe call for a reflection on the implications of these phenomena for social housing providers. Several studies indicate that social housing providers in Europe have begun to adopt new (social) entrepreneurial strategies and are becoming more innovative as a response to these challenges. These strategies imply tackling the tensions between (at times) conflicting drivers, notably those arising from the State, the market and communities. However, research in this topic so far is fragmented, focussing on one country or on specific sub-areas such as asset management and non- housing activities and rarely connects with the relevant wider literature on the third sector and social enterprise. Within this context, this PhD research has sought to widen this discussion by providing new insights through a comparative study of the ways in which individual social housing providers are relating to (i.e. responding to and influencing) these contextual changes. More specifically, the research sought to better understand the complex process of decision-making these companies undergo to manage their responses to competing drivers. Companies operating in two countries (England and The Netherlands) were studied in-depth. In both countries, the social rental sector has played a prominent role in their respective welfare states for decades. While both are amongst countries with the highest share of social rental housing in Europe, each represents a different type of welfare state and of social housing provision - following Kemeny’s classification, a unitary system (the Netherlands) and a dualist system (England). The broad aim of this PhD was to deepen the understanding of the ways in which contextual drivers impact on the mission, values and activities of social housing organisations. Furthermore, the study sought to understand how these organisations are positioning themselves vis-à-vis the State, market and community. The above aims translate into three research questions: (1) How are contextual developments impacting on the missions, values and activities of social housing organisations? (2) How do these organisations position themselves vis-à-vis the State, the market and community? and (3) How are competing values enacted in the decision-making process exercised by these organisations vis-à-vis these contextual drivers? The universe for this PhD research consists of social purpose organisations, not owned by the State, which operate on a non-profit distribution basis. Together they are part of a wide range of ‘third sector’ actors providing social and affordable housing across most of North Western Europe. The PhD adopted a pluralistic epistemological approach with an interpretivist emphasis, with significant use of qualitative research methods. This approach was deemed useful to give a voice to the subject(s) of study. The research design included a mixed methods approach and a longitudinal, international and inter-organisational case study research design, involving two company-cases. The companies were studied over a four-year period, starting in March 2008. The research design and data analysis draws on elements of grounded theory, and on the work of Eisenhardt on ‘building theory from cases’. Following this approach, a series of ‘theoretical propositions’ were devised from the study’s findings in order to answer each of the three research questions. In relation to the first research question, the study found that contextual developments and the missions, values and activities of social housing organisations are in a two-way relationship. From an initial assumption of unidirectional causality, in the process of the research it became clear that the relationship between contextual developments and organisational change is more often than not one of mutual causality. We qualified this relationship through six propositions. First, we posited that market and State drivers have a relatively stronger impact on social housing organisations as compared to community drivers. Second, we postulated that both market and State drivers have a knock-on effect on community drivers. Third, we established that State drivers pose continuous exogenous shocks to social housing providers by means of constant policy changes. Our fourth proposition stated that in a context of economic crisis the relationship between market drivers and social housing organisations is marked by volatility. Our fifth proposition established that all three types of contextual drivers are reinforcing the long-term trend of deepening residualisation of the social housing sector. The sixth proposition emphasizes the long-term mutually shaping relationship between context and social housing organisations. Findings on the second research question led us to describe the positioning of social housing organisations vis-à-vis their environment as a ‘dynamic balancing act’. In order to understand the way(s) in which social housing organisations position themselves in relation to changes in their environment we drew on theories of social enterprise and hybridity to unpack three ideal-typical strategic orientations that may be at play in this process: State, market and community. We adopted a triangular model to illustrate these orientations and developed a classification model to understand the ‘strategic position’ that these organisations adopt vis-à-vis their environment. We looked at three different dimensions of this strategic position, namely mission, values and activities, each captured by a different type of variables in the classification: ‘descriptor’ (to capture the formal characteristics of the organisation), ‘motivator’ (as related to the organisation’s mission), and ‘behaviour’ (referring to the organisation’s activities). Upon applying this classification to our case studies, our findings resulted in three propositions. First, it became clear that while descriptor variables confirmed the hybrid formal characteristics of social housing organisations, they do not account on their own for their position in relation to State, market and community. Our second proposition stated that social housing organisations are constantly balancing pressures to (re)define their mission. Our study found that in this process, each company is faced with trade-offs when considering their organisational mission in relation to a changing mandate from the State domain, while at the same time weighing demands from the market and community domain. Third, we posited that social housing organisations exert different degrees of agency in their positioning vis-à-vis the State, market and community. We identified a continuum of actions that these organisations have put in place to respond to key contextual changes, ranging from ‘reactive’ to ‘proactive’ and ‘strategic’. Hence, social housing organisations would have the capacity to shape their environment and / or at least, their position in relation to this environment. On our third research question, we found that enacting competing values in social housing organisations implies multiple rationalities at play in decision-making. The PhD research used the study of a critical incident in each company to describe the ways in which competing values are enacted in the decision-making process of these organisations in relation to the three types of contextual drivers. In each case, a critical incident was chosen in conjunction with the companies to be studied over a prolonged period of time. Both incidents turned out to be of regulatory nature (i.e. State-driven); in the English case, it was the Comprehensive spending review (CSR) announced in October 2010 and a series of major welfare reforms implemented by the coalition government. In the Netherlands, the Dutch government ruling on the issue of State aid by housing associations implemented in January 2011. The companies’ responses to these critical incidents, respectively, were operationalised through a ‘strategic decision’ made by each of them vis-à-vis these events, defined as a decision recognised as having significant implications for the structure, direction or purpose of an organisation. The English company defined their strategic decision as the impact on the company’s vision, direction, strategy and financial capacity of the October CSR and the shake-up in the welfare benefit system. More specifically, the company’s bid to the HCA for the four-year development programme in the first half of 2011 formed the basis for the study of this critical incident. The strategic decision of the Dutch company was whether to follow the Dutch government’s ruling on income ceilings or not. Furthermore, the company had to decide how to re-organize its financing in order to comply with the required administrative split between activities classified as ‘Services of General Economic Interest’ (SGEI) and ‘non SGEI’. The study of these critical incidents looked at the decision-making process from both a formal and content perspective, distinguishing motivator and behaviour variables in the process. In terms of form, we found that different modes of decision-making co-exist in the process. Participants in each company use a variety of ‘political tactics’ to influence the decision-making process. Taken

Rapid and deep changes in society, the economy and policy over the last decades are having an increasing impact on the delivery of social housing in North Western Europe. These changes are transforming the way in which social housing providers perform their task and are reshaping their relationships with the State, communities and with other market actors. The combination of continued State withdrawal from service provision, the deep and persistent effects of the global financial crisis that begun in 2008 and profound changes in the type of demand for social housing across North Western Europe call for a reflection on the implications of these phenomena for social housing providers. Several studies indicate that social housing providers in Europe have begun to adopt new (social) entrepreneurial strategies and are becoming more innovative as a response to these challenges. These strategies imply tackling the tensions between (at times) conflicting drivers, notably those arising from the State, the market and communities. However, research in this topic so far is fragmented, focussing on one country or on specific sub-areas such as asset management and non- housing activities and rarely connects with the relevant wider literature on the third sector and social enterprise. Within this context, this PhD research has sought to widen this discussion by providing new insights through a comparative study of the ways in which individual social housing providers are relating to (i.e. responding to and influencing) these contextual changes. More specifically, the research sought to better understand the complex process of decision-making these companies undergo to manage their responses to competing drivers. Companies operating in two countries (England and The Netherlands) were studied in-depth. In both countries, the social rental sector has played a prominent role in their respective welfare states for decades. While both are amongst countries with the highest share of social rental housing in Europe, each represents a different type of welfare state and of social housing provision - following Kemeny’s classification, a unitary system (the Netherlands) and a dualist system (England). The broad aim of this PhD was to deepen the understanding of the ways in which contextual drivers impact on the mission, values and activities of social housing organisations. Furthermore, the study sought to understand how these organisations are positioning themselves vis-à-vis the State, market and community. The above aims translate into three research questions: (1) How are contextual developments impacting on the missions, values and activities of social housing organisations? (2) How do these organisations position themselves vis-à-vis the State, the market and community? and (3) How are competing values enacted in the decision-making process exercised by these organisations vis-à-vis these contextual drivers? The universe for this PhD research consists of social purpose organisations, not owned by the State, which operate on a non-profit distribution basis. Together they are part of a wide range of ‘third sector’ actors providing social and affordable housing across most of North Western Europe. The PhD adopted a pluralistic epistemological approach with an interpretivist emphasis, with significant use of qualitative research methods. This approach was deemed useful to give a voice to the subject(s) of study. The research design included a mixed methods approach and a longitudinal, international and inter-organisational case study research design, involving two company-cases. The companies were studied over a four-year period, starting in March 2008. The research design and data analysis draws on elements of grounded theory, and on the work of Eisenhardt on ‘building theory from cases’. Following this approach, a series of ‘theoretical propositions’ were devised from the study’s findings in order to answer each of the three research questions. In relation to the first research question, the study found that contextual developments and the missions, values and activities of social housing organisations are in a two-way relationship. From an initial assumption of unidirectional causality, in the process of the research it became clear that the relationship between contextual developments and organisational change is more often than not one of mutual causality. We qualified this relationship through six propositions. First, we posited that market and State drivers have a relatively stronger impact on social housing organisations as compared to community drivers. Second, we postulated that both market and State drivers have a knock-on effect on community drivers. Third, we established that State drivers pose continuous exogenous shocks to social housing providers by means of constant policy changes. Our fourth proposition stated that in a context of economic crisis the relationship between market drivers and social housing organisations is marked by volatility. Our fifth proposition established that all three types of contextual drivers are reinforcing the long-term trend of deepening residualisation of the social housing sector. The sixth proposition emphasizes the long-term mutually shaping relationship between context and social housing organisations. Findings on the second research question led us to describe the positioning of social housing organisations vis-à-vis their environment as a ‘dynamic balancing act’. In order to understand the way(s) in which social housing organisations position themselves in relation to changes in their environment we drew on theories of social enterprise and hybridity to unpack three ideal-typical strategic orientations that may be at play in this process: State, market and community. We adopted a triangular model to illustrate these orientations and developed a classification model to understand the ‘strategic position’ that these organisations adopt vis-à-vis their environment. We looked at three different dimensions of this strategic position, namely mission, values and activities, each captured by a different type of variables in the classification: ‘descriptor’ (to capture the formal characteristics of the organisation), ‘motivator’ (as related to the organisation’s mission), and ‘behaviour’ (referring to the organisation’s activities). Upon applying this classification to our case studies, our findings resulted in three propositions. First, it became clear that while descriptor variables confirmed the hybrid formal characteristics of social housing organisations, they do not account on their own for their position in relation to State, market and community. Our second proposition stated that social housing organisations are constantly balancing pressures to (re)define their mission. Our study found that in this process, each company is faced with trade-offs when considering their organisational mission in relation to a changing mandate from the State domain, while at the same time weighing demands from the market and community domain. Third, we posited that social housing organisations exert different degrees of agency in their positioning vis-à-vis the State, market and community. We identified a continuum of actions that these organisations have put in place to respond to key contextual changes, ranging from ‘reactive’ to ‘proactive’ and ‘strategic’. Hence, social housing organisations would have the capacity to shape their environment and / or at least, their position in relation to this environment. On our third research question, we found that enacting competing values in social housing organisations implies multiple rationalities at play in decision-making. The PhD research used the study of a critical incident in each company to describe the ways in which competing values are enacted in the decision-making process of these organisations in relation to the three types of contextual drivers. In each case, a critical incident was chosen in conjunction with the companies to be studied over a prolonged period of time. Both incidents turned out to be of regulatory nature (i.e. State-driven); in the English case, it was the Comprehensive spending review (CSR) announced in October 2010 and a series of major welfare reforms implemented by the coalition government. In the Netherlands, the Dutch government ruling on the issue of State aid by housing associations implemented in January 2011. The companies’ responses to these critical incidents, respectively, were operationalised through a ‘strategic decision’ made by each of them vis-à-vis these events, defined as a decision recognised as having significant implications for the structure, direction or purpose of an organisation. The English company defined their strategic decision as the impact on the company’s vision, direction, strategy and financial capacity of the October CSR and the shake-up in the welfare benefit system. More specifically, the company’s bid to the HCA for the four-year development programme in the first half of 2011 formed the basis for the study of this critical incident. The strategic decision of the Dutch company was whether to follow the Dutch government’s ruling on income ceilings or not. Furthermore, the company had to decide how to re-organize its financing in order to comply with the required administrative split between activities classified as ‘Services of General Economic Interest’ (SGEI) and ‘non SGEI’. The study of these critical incidents looked at the decision-making process from both a formal and content perspective, distinguishing motivator and behaviour variables in the process. In terms of form, we found that different modes of decision-making co-exist in the process. Participants in each company use a variety of ‘political tactics’ to influence the decision-making process. Taken all together, the existence of these tactics confirms the presence of institutional entrepreneurial behaviour amongst company executives taking part in the process. Realizing that these tactics exist is important because it shows the ways in which different participants and their (departmental) agendas try to influence the outcome of the decision. In terms of content, a first proposition established that social housing organisations operate with multiple rationalities; non-rational factors such as politics, intuition and past experience played a key role alongside technical considerations. In our fourth proposition we identified a number of ‘dilemmas of hybridity’ that these organisations have to deal with to stay true to their mission while tackling pressures from different State, market and community. Second, we discussed the ambivalent relationship that social housing providers have with risk. A number of questions were raised on what (if any) risk attitude lies closer to third sector service providers in relation to what is expected from commercial enterprises or even from the State. This is relevant in particular given the more general trend to transfer risk from the State to third sector organisations in service provision overall in European societies. Last, our research found that social housing organisations are consistent with stated core values but are constantly making choices on how to enact these values. While contextual drivers may appear not to affect the mission and values of these social housing organisations, the former do impact on the companies’ strategies and activities. This means that there can be significant gaps between espoused and enacted values. Policy and practice implications emerging from the findings to all three research questions included: First, we raised the question as to whether the aggregate impact of the regulatory changes at sector level in each country - such as the ones portrayed by the respective critical incidents - would be the convergence of both countries’ housing association sectors in terms of their role and scope. Second, the study coincides with views in both countries pointing to the lack of a ‘single voice’ or unified strategic action fields. In addition, in both cases, although to different extents, the perceived ‘policy confusion’ – namely, the view that government was sending conflicting signals to social housing organisations - raised tensions between the redefined mandate and the organisational missions of the individual companies. Third, findings suggest a trend towards increasing differentiation within the housing association sector in each country as a result of growing tensions between mandate (social housing as a public service obligation as defined by the State) and mission (social housing as ‘core business’ as define by each organisation). Fourth, the question emerges as to whether the identity of a social housing provider operating along the wide spectrum between the two ‘pure’ types is defined by its activities (behaviour variables) or by their organisational form/legal status (descriptor variables). The concept of hybridity proved useful to gauge this complexity, as illustrated in the ‘dilemmas’ companies have to face when making strategic decisions. Fifth, findings showed that community drivers tend to stay constant or change slightly over the long term, except for those resulting from the combined impacts of the economic crisis and the resulting political and regulatory changes. This leads to the recommendation for social housing enterprises to consider longer-term political (and market) trends as well, to anticipate on going (neoliberal) trends and possibly fundamental changes in housing preferences. Sixth, while values tend to stay constant, mission is permanently redefined in relation to pressures from the environment (including changes in mandate) and activities change accordingly. In order to stay true to this identity, social housing providers ought to be able to anticipate conflicting logics and put mechanisms in place to adjust their policies and activities to respond to these challenges while keeping its core values intact. This PhD has contributed to science both from a theoretical and methodological perspective. Through a series of theoretical propositions, we have added to a developing body of knowledge, specifically on the nature of the relationship between contextual drivers and organisational changes in social housing organisations. Our classification of social enterprise in housing allows comparisons between organisations operating in diverse contexts, which share a similar core task. This can be useful for scientific, political and practical purposes. From a scientific perspective, it can be used as a basis for identifying similarities and differences between social housing organisations within and between countries at a much deeper level than traditional comparisons on the basis of tenure or other formal organisational characteristics. Policy makers can also use this information to understand the factors leading to different types of behaviours by social housing providers. For professionals, this model may be useful to assess to what extent their organisation is being consistent with regards to espoused vs. enacted values. From a societal perspective, findings of this PhD can help us reflect on the future role of social housing in the context of changing social contracts and social cohesion and welfare models in each country. Furthermore, the research helped participating practitioners to reflect about a number of organisational dilemmas they face, as illustrated in our findings.

Social Housing Organisations in England and The Netherlands: Between the State, Market and Community

The shortage of social housing is a crucial element of the UK housing crisis. In England, social rented housing provision significantly relies on market homes construction, with detrimental impacts on residents and the environment. Moratoria are often cited in the degrowth literature as policy tools supporting strategies to break free from growth-driven mechanisms and achieve high levels of wellbeing while reducing environmental pressures. However, the systemic effects of such a policy on housing and its potential drawbacks are at present understudied. This study explores the extent to which a moratorium on new construction in the housing sector would be an effective, desirable, and feasible policy to address the shortage of good quality social housing. We used existing causal loop diagrams (CLDs) to formulate qualitative hypotheses on the effects of a moratorium on the structures underpinning the construction and demolition of social housing estates. We then explored perceived obstacles or opportunities to its uptake in a workshop with four housing associations, the largest providers of social housing in England. Our CLDs suggest that a moratorium could help to address the growth-dependent mechanisms of social housing provision, with systemic benefits for both social tenants and housing associations. However, the workshop revealed that its adoption would depend on whether the maintenance, repair, and retrofit of the existing stock could off set the perceived advantages of new construction (e.g. quality, quantity, adequacy). Through the use of systems thinking tools, our findings support dialogue around alternatives to the growth-dependent paradigm undermining housing provision within planetary boundaries.

Rapid and deep changes in society, the economy and policy over the last decades are having an increasing impact on the delivery of social housing in North Western Europe. These changes are transforming the way in which social housing providers perform their task and are reshaping their relationships with the State, communities and with other market actors. The combination of continued State withdrawal from service provision, the deep and persistent effects of the global financial crisis that begun in 2008 and profound changes in the type of demand for social housing across North Western Europe call for a reflection on the implications of these phenomena for social housing providers. Several studies indicate that social housing providers in Europe have begun to adopt new (social) entrepreneurial strategies and are becoming more innovative as a response to these challenges. These strategies imply tackling the tensions between (at times) conflicting drivers, notably those arising from the State, the market and communities. However, research in this topic so far is fragmented, focussing on one country or on specific sub-areas such as asset management and non-housing activities and rarely connects with the relevant wider literature on the third sector and social enterprise. Within this context, this PhD research has sought to widen this discussion by providing new insights through a comparative study of the ways in which individual social housing providers are relating to (i.e. responding to and influencing) these contextual changes. More specifically, the research sought to better understand the complex process of decision-making these companies undergo to manage their responses to competing drivers. Companies operating in two countries (England and The Netherlands) were studied in-depth. In both countries, the social rental sector has played a prominent role in their respective welfare states for decades. While both are amongst countries with the highest share of social rental housing in Europe, each represents a different type of welfare state and of social housing provision - following Kemeny’s classification, a unitary system (the Netherlands) and a dualist system (England).

Introduction: In recent years, a weak interest in this segment a of the property market has been noticeable among social housing providers. The demand from practice and the existing gap in the Polish literature create a wide field for scientific research of a cognitive and applied nature. Considerations and research in the field of investing in social housing are justified, among others, by the fact that the validity of investing in the social housing market has already been confirmed in highly developed countries, for example in Austria. In Poland, however, this segment is still in the growth phase. Therefore, the potential of the housing and financial markets has not been fully exploited yet. A review of foreign experiences in creating a housing offer for social housing, as well as a detailed analysis of model and innovative solutions, will allow the identification of key success factors for this type of investment project. Aim of the paper: The aim of the work is to present the Viennese model of social construction and housing, its role in the functional and spatial structure of the city, the administrative and organizational environment, and to assess the housing conditions and quality of life that this model offers. Materials and methods: The article uses a structured literature review of social housing, including those from publications of the Statistisches Jahrbuch der Stadt Wien. The study has an overview character. Results and conclusions: The city of Vienna, as a model example of social housing with specific conditions that are difficult to find in other cities and being a city-land that can create its own tax policy, which largely financed social housing, has created a unique ability to meet housing needs through appropriate activities of organizational and administrative structures. and units responsible for construction and social housing management. The Vienna model is not fully adaptable to Polish conditions, due to differences resulting from administrative, legal and financial regulations, as well as a different model of approach to social housing in Austria and Poland (in Austria it is addressed to every citizen, in Poland only to the people).

Since the 1980s, as part of the gradual transformation of the welfare state in large parts of Europe, many countries have witnessed a decline in the provision of social housing. Overall, there has been a trend towards housing becoming more market oriented, competitive and opened up to economic pressures. Supply subsidies to social housing have been replaced or complemented in a number of countries by demand-side subsidies through housing benefits and vouchers. In this context, social housing organisations across the European Union (EU) are facing a paradoxical challenge: while they are expected to fulfil a ‘social mission’ (i.e. provide access to decent housing to people who cannot afford it in the market), the steep reduction in subsidies and in public investment in housing are putting increasing pressure on these organisations to become more ‘market-oriented’ or ‘business-like’ as a way to become self-financing. This paper aims to shed light on these developments on the basis of the findings of a comparative study on the management of social rental housing organisations across the European Union. The study looks at how ‘social’ and ‘commercial’ objectives are reflected in strategy formulation, the key challenges faced by organisations, and the specific responses and innovative management approaches being put in place to deal with these challenges. In this paper we present and discuss findings from the study. In the relative absence of theory in this field, the analysis of findings uses a set of management concepts specifically crafted for the study of management models of social rental housing in Europe. The study is the first ever comparative European research of the management systems, values, visions and strategies of organisations that own and manage properties in the social rental sector.

Approved Housing Bodies (AHBs) are not-for-profit organisations who provide and manage social rental housing for households who are eligible for means-tested social housing support. I argue that the ambiguous positioning of AHBs as not quite public but not quite private is an outcome of neoliberal housing policy, whereby AHBs and private social housing have been valorised as part of a shift away from local authority and public social housing provision. I highlight how state policy has been actively reoriented by and towards financial measurements and narratives, with an emphasis on expanding and regulating the AHB sector and leveraging private investment in social housing through it. In turn, the AHB sector has been structurally transformed, with an increasing bifurcation between larger AHBs with extensive and evolving general needs-based social housing portfolios and what are often smaller specialist needs-based AHBs. The paper uses financialisation to outline this reorientation and structural transformation of Irish social housing provision. Overall, drawing from earlier work on neoliberalism in Ireland, I argue that the Irish example suggests that the financialisation of social housing unfolds in context-specific ways, which may be piecemeal, ad-hoc, and ‘commonsensical’, rather than a coherent strategy.

This introduction to the special issue on ‘market concepts, coordination mechanisms and new actors in social housing’ makes the case for multi-disciplinary and multi-level studies of the impacts of market-oriented policies aimed at social housing. The authors suggest that privatisation, tenant purchase programmes, market oriented policy shifts, increased regulation, changing household needs and lingering problems with stigmatisation have combined to create a challenging operating environment for social housing providers and that the phenomenon of ‘marketisation’ of social housing has four distinct strands. These are: 1) problematising, 2) bypassing, 3) replacing and 4) transforming social housing, and the focus of the articles in the special issue is on the fourth strand. Transforming social housing encompasses policies aimed at increasing the interaction between social and private housing providers, encouraging managerialist approaches to housing provision and introducing regulations and/or incentives to increase competition among social housing providers as well as between social and private landlords. The editorial concludes with suggested directions for research into the marketisation of social housing and recommends that researchers continue to pursue the connections that can be made among different disciplines in the study of organisational change in this sector.

Rote Wien, an X-ray of Vienna's social housing," presents an in-depth critical mapping exploration into the esteemed social housing system of Vienna, Austria. Drawing parallels between maps and X-ray images of urban space, this study delves into the intricate process of critical mapping, elucidating Vienna's multifaceted approach to social housing. Through meticulous analysis of historical data and contemporary policies, the research examines key factors shaping Vienna's housing landscape, including affordability, ownership, housing quality, and proximity. Rooted in the principles of affordability, high quality, social cohesion, and socioeconomic integration, Vienna's social housing model traces its origins back to the visionary initiatives of the "Red Vienna" era following the First World War. However, despite its exemplary status, Vienna confronts challenges arising from shifting national and regional neoliberal ideologies, budget constraints, and the influx of international real estate investment. By dissecting the evolution of Vienna's social housing from its inception to present-day adaptations, this study provides valuable insights into the city's resilience and innovative strategies in the face of urban housing crises. Moreover, "Rote Wien" serves as a seminal resource for architects, urban planners, and policymakers, offering a blueprint for addressing contemporary housing challenges in cities worldwide. By examining the successes and shortcomings of Vienna's social housing model, this critical mapping endeavor not only elucidates the intricacies of urban housing dynamics but also provides a framework for fostering inclusive, sustainable, and livable cities for all residents. Through its comprehensive analysis and nuanced insights, "Rote Wien" offers a compelling narrative of Vienna's social housing journey, underscoring the pivotal role of critical mapping in understanding and reshaping urban landscapes to promote equity, accessibility, and social cohesion. In this critical mapping study, multiple types of maps and graphs were used. A chrono-style mapping and temporal analysis (Figure 1 ) was used to deploy a historical study through the use of chrono-style maps, which visually represent spatial configurations over different time periods. This map was complemented by timelines that intricately link spatial developments with temporal dynamics, allowing for a nuanced understanding of the evolution of, in this case, Vienna's social housing system. By overlaying historical data with geographic representations, this form of mapping facilitates the identification of patterns, shifts and continuities in the urban landscape over time. This approach allows researchers to uncover the historical processes that have shaped Vienna's social housing policies, from their inception during the 'Red Vienna' era to their adaptations in response to contemporary challenges. This temporal analysis provides valuable insights into the long-term trajectories of social housing development, highlighting key moments of transformation, continuity and divergence within Vienna's urban fabric.

This paper considers the need for conceptual renewal in comparative housing research. Since the mid-1990s, Kemeny’s model of ‘unitary’ and ‘dualist’ rental markets and Harloe’s classification of ‘mass’ and ‘residual’ social housing provision have been repeatedly recycled in comparative studies of ‘social’ and ‘public’ housing provision. Amidst international neoliberal policy mobilities, their models based on liberal welfare regimes wield particular power. Conceived during neoliberal cutbacks of public services, Kemeny’s ‘dualist’ rental market and Harloe’s ‘residual’ model of social housing similarly depict state-subsidised rental housing provision as bureaucratic, and targeted to the poor. Despite empirical change, these models are still used to describe liberal welfare regimes, and to theorise international policy convergence. Based on a review of recent market-oriented reforms of state-subsidised rental housing provision in the US, Australia and England; original neoliberal ‘sites of production’, this contribution asks whether these conceptual models still reflect the empirics. Findings diverge from the models, undermining their assumptions about how neoliberal reforms progress.

Proefwonen voor mensen met een verstandelijke beperking en/of psychiatrische problemen

The 1988 Housing Act signalled substantial changes in the provision of social housing in England. The act places housing associations at the centre of social housing provision. Moreover, their role as the main providers of social housing depends, in line with government intentions, on the greater use of private finance, as the proportion of public sector funds declines. The introduction of what amounts to a new regime for social housing provision in England has effectively changed the agenda of provision from one informed by public sector thinking to one established around private sector criteria. Housing associations have thus had to readjust quickly to an environment in which they are now exposed to a variety of interrelated risks. In order to manage such risks, associations have had to reorganise internally and to reevaluate their priorities. Against this background, this paper is aimed, first, at reporting on how a selection of case-study associations active across the main regions of England have faced up to the challenges that the new environment presents, and, second, at presenting the views of a selection of private sector financial institutions about their perceptions of social housing as an investment medium, the types of risk they view as characteristic of this sector, and their response to the efforts made by associations to manage the risks of social housing provision. The paper is concluded by setting out the likely shape that social housing provision will take in the immediate future.

The absence of choice stigmatises Social Housing. “Intentionally Homeless” for refusal to accept a “reasonable” offer of social housing provision by Local Authorities in the UK should be done away with. Instead, a liberalization of the tax rules to allow the private rented sector to compete for social housing tenants in receipt of Housing Benefit. To make it financially profitable for the private sector, a tax dividend/refund for charging rents at a social rent (determined as the maximum local housing allowance for the unit) and zero capital gains tax should be considered in government fiscal policy. Currently, this provision is being made by Housing Associations which get discounted land and/or subsidy in order to enable social housing provision. The entry of the private sector in the supply of “permanent housing” would boost the supply side and reduce the cost to local authorities of temporary private sector supply in the form of bed and breakfast hostels and hotels to house the homeless/statutory provision. The social costs/consequences on families and children growing up in deprived and unsuitable environments is far ranging and a monetary value underestimates its true costs given the impact on social development of children of living in such hostels] Though the idea of broadening supply to private sector institutions is not new; take up has not being material due to the low financial returns. A preferential tax rate for private sector institutions set up as “Real-Estate Social Housing Companies”/RESHC (with profit companies with shareholders from Pension funds and/or private investors or landlords) may improve take up. The tax rate rates needs to reflect the discount between market and social rents to incentivise the private sector to “invest” in social housing. Where the tax differential is not sufficient to promote investment, local authorities should look to purchase agricultural land (at agricultural market values) and grant planning permission for housing; sites are then transferred to RESHC and/or Housing Associations (via an invitation to bid process with the discount to market value clearly stated) in order for bidders to assess the overall return. Such transparency may ensure that both the local authority and the RESHC shares the benefit of the market value on the sites with planning permission. (though land-owners may also require a return to commensurate?). Appropriate safeguards are required to ensure that the private sector institutions meet standards as set out for public sector bodies in order to qualify for the tax dividend/discounted land. There should be no restriction in locations designated for private sector social housing renters and fixed terms of between 5-25 years could be muted for social housing provision on the discounted land/ or as a condition for continuation of the tax breaks. The increase in choice will stimulate competition and ensure that standards are driven up with a greater deal of mobility for social housing tenants to move to areas of employment and growth. Provision does not necessarily have to be in urban/built up areas but could extend to rural areas – small holdings for agriculture. Special provision for gypsies/travellers/others and provision in rural areas for small holdings for agriculture/farming/poultry should also be available as well as provision for specialist groups; including elderly support schemes and youth/family employment support schemes.